LECTURERS QUESTIONNAIRE

CAD-CAM-CNC topics and the effectiveness of the three T&L methods. Previous studies (Bhavnani, Suresh, Bonnie.2000; Dye, 2003; Gall, and James 2002; Borg, And Gall, 1979), suggested that a part of the problem in CAD-CAM-CNC subject area is the use of inappropriate teaching methods which affect student’s achievement. Through this questionnaire an attempt has been made to understand Lecturer’s experience of the T&L process and the questions were divided into five categories (Figure 4.8.)

Figure 4.8. Key areas for Lectures’ questionnaire

The distribution of Lecturers’ responses to the questionnaire is presented in Appendix 3 teacher Questionnaire and the results of quantitative data analysis for Lecturers’ responses divided in the five key areas are included in Appendix 5 teacher data analysis.

The qualitative analysis of relevant Lecturers’ responses is done by observation as follows:

Key area 1 - Planning and organising the teaching session

• Only 20% of the Lecturers teaching Group 3 have their own techniques to prepare their lessons so the rest are using some written guides in order to design their T&L sessions which is understandable because they are dealing with computer simulation activities. • All Lecturers teaching Group 1 (traditional T&L approach) are using the Lecturer’s guide

because this method does not require the introduction of ICT in teaching.

• It is difficult to explain various tasks involved in CAD-CAM-CNC subject area without using a number of examples. So 90% of Lecturers teaching Group 1, 70 % of Lecturers teaching Group 2 and 100 % of Lecturers teaching Group 3 agreed that they use many examples to explain lessons.

Questionnaire Classroom Management Statement No. Statement No. Statement No. Statement No. Statement No. 1, 3, 7, 14, 18. 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 21, 28, 29, 52, 53, 63. 12, 13, 15,19, 22,30, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 61, 62, 64, 65. 2, 23, 25, 31, 32, 51, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 66. 17, 20, 24, 26, 27, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 59. Key areas Assessment mechanisms Lecturer's perception of teaching method used Presentation Organisation

Key area 2 – Delivering the instructional material

• 90% of the Lecturers for Group 2 and Group 3 use visual aids as a normal part of their repertoire, where as only 50% of the Lecturers for Group 1 do it. The Lecturers were asked earlier in the current research if they have adequate teaching aids at institute, like TV, video, computer and handouts. 90% per cent of them said the support is inadequate. This indicates that there is not enough provision in the institute in terms of using these teaching aids.

• 80 % of Lecturers for Group 1 recognised that they have difficulties in presenting CAD- CAM-CNC topics because the traditional T&L method is not the most suitable one for discussing modern subjects. However 40 % of Lecturers for Group 2 and 30 % of Lecturers for Group 3 have difficulties in presenting the subjects because the computer technology is helping them to explain the difficult drawing or manufacturing tasks with ease.

• 80 % of Lecturers for Group 1 agreed that the students find it difficult to see the relevance of what they learn in CAD-CAM-CNC modules because it is difficult to make the connection between theory and practical applications with traditional T&L approach. Only 50% of Lecturers for Group 2 and 30% of Lecturers for Group 3 have the same problems combining the teaching with simulations gives a lot of opportunities to link theory with practice.

Key area 3 - Management of students within the classroom

• 40 % of Lecturers for Group 1 agreed that group learning is an effective method but students have limited freedom in choosing activities in the traditional T&L approach. A number of 80 % of Lecturers for Group 2 and 90 % of Lecturers for Group 3 agreed with this concept because the unsupervised study of computer tutorials encourages better communication between students.

• 100% of Lecturers for Group 1 find it difficult to encourage the students to participate in classroom activities because the traditional T&L approach is not conducive to students’ interaction. However 70 % of Lecturers for Group 2 and 80 % of Lecturers for Group 3 were happy with their teaching methods and effective students’ interaction when teaching with computer assisted simulations.

• 20% of Lecturers for Group 1 agreed that the traditional T&L method is suitable for a large group of students while 60% of Lecturers for Group 2 and 70% of the Lecturers for Group 3 agreed that the computer assisted teaching methods are suitable for classes with large numbers of students. Once again the use of CAL package and CAI approach increases the effectiveness of T&L processes.

Key area 4 - Assessment of students' performance

• 100 % of Lecturers for Group 1 and for Group 2 are reinforcing the transmitted knowledge by asking relevant questions at the end of sessions. Only 90 % of Lecturers for Group 3 are doing the same thing because the extensive use of computer tutorials is helping students to understand better and solve various exercises.

• Only 60% of Lecturers for Group 1 encourage the students to express their opinions and judge their drawing and manufacturing parts for their usefulness because T&L approach is teacher-centred. A number of 80 % of Lecturers for Group 2 and 90 % of Lecturers for Group 3 are supporting students to have their own views because the student-centred approach is conducive to this type of behaviour.

• Only 10 % of Lecturers for Group 1 find it easy to rate the students’ knowledge, understanding and abilities because the traditional T&L method does not offer a lot of opportunities to perform formative assessment. But 70 % of Lecturers for Group 2 and 60% of Lecturers for Group 3 find it easy to assess the students’ work by using computers.

• No Lecturers for Group 1 consider that the traditional T&L method increases the students’ performance while 70 % of Lecturers for Group 2 and 80 % of Lecturers for Group 3 sustain that the use of CAI in educational process increases students’ performance.

Key area 5 - Lecturers’ attitudes towards various T & L methods.

• 60 % of Lecturers for Group 1 and 70 % of Lecturers for Group 3 have friendly relationships with students so the students do not find it difficult to ask the Lecturers for more explanations as needed during the lesson time. However 90% of Lecturers for Group 2 communicate in a friendly manner with students because Lecturers’ attitudes became friendlier when using computer technology.

• 70 % of Lecturers for Group 2 and 80 % of Lecturers for Group 3 mentioned that the teaching method with support of computer technology encourages the students to learn. A number of 70% of Lecturers for Group 1 found it difficult to do the same thing because the traditional T&L approach with face-to-face lectures and Lectures’ explanations for CAD- CAM tasks and CNC operations are not so appealing to students.

• 80 % of Lecturers for Group 2 and Group 3 mentioned that CAL encourages the students to think logically (not only to memorise) since the structure of the drawing and manufacturing lessons is built rationally according to the students’ needs. All Lecturers for Group 1 disagreed

with this statement because in the traditional teaching the students are following Lecturers’ logic rather than thinking for themselves and Lecturers’ main concern is to finish their lesson rather than giving students time to think.

The overall effectiveness of teaching methodology incorporates all answers and is presented in Appendix 5 (Data Analysis of Lecturers’ Answers to Questionnaires).